5. This entire matter may be usefully illustrated by having recourse to an analogy which was established on a former occasion: namely, the analogy between the _Written_ and the _Incarnate_ Word[398]. That our LORD JESUS CHRIST is at once very GOD and very Man, we all fully admit; although _the manner_ of the union of GODHEAD and Manhood in His one Person we confess ourselves quite unable to comprehend. Even so, that there is a human as well as a Divine element in Holy Scripture,--_who_ so blind as to overlook? _who_ so weak as to deny? And yet, to dissect out that human element,--_who_ (but a fool) so rash as to attempt?... To apply this to the matter before us. _Certain parts_ of Holy Scripture you think, (for reasons to yourself best known,) are not to be looked upon as inspired in the same sense as the rest of the volume. Just as reasonably might you try to persuade me that our SAVIOUR was not _in the same sense_ our SAVIOUR when He ate and drank at the Pharisees' board, as when He cast out devils and raised the dead. Was He not equally the Incarnate WORD at every stage of His earthly career; from the time that He was laid in the manger, until the instant when He expired upon the Cross? The degradation which He endured in Pilate's judgment-hall did not affect the reality of the great truth that the GODHEAD was indissolubly joined to the Manhood in His Person. He was not less very GOD as well as very Man when some one spat upon Him, than at His Transfiguration and at His Ascension into Heaven!... Why then should the mean aspect and lowly office of certain parts of Scripture,--(genealogical details and the narrative of what we think ordinary occurrences,)--be supposed to disentitle those parts to the praise of being _as fully inspired as any thing in the whole compass of the Bible?_ I may remind you, in passing, that the narrative of Scripture, even in its humblest, and (to all appearance) most human parts, has a perpetual note of Divinity set upon it. The historical portions are throughout interspersed with indications that the writer is beholding the transactions which he records, from a Divine, (not a human,) point of view. GOD is invariably, (sooner or later,) mentioned as the Agent; or there is some reference made to GOD; or to GOD'S Word. As Butler expresses it,--"The general design of Scripture ... may be said to be, to give us an account of the world, in this one single view,--_as GOD'S world_: by which it appears essentially distinguished from all other books, so far as I have found, except such as are copied from it[399]."